Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
POWhat's the most efficient query?
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. POWhat's the most efficient query?
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>I have a table named Projects that has the following relationships:</p> <p>has many Contributions has many Payments</p> <p>In my result set, I need the following aggregate values:</p> <ul> <li>Number of unique contributors (DonorID on the Contribution table)</li> <li>Total contributed (SUM of Amount on Contribution table)</li> <li>Total paid (SUM of PaymentAmount on Payment table)</li> </ul> <p>Because there are so many aggregate functions and multiple joins, it gets messy do use standard aggregate functions the the GROUP BY clause. I also need the ability to sort and filter these fields. So I've come up with two options:</p> <p>Using subqueries:</p> <pre><code>SELECT Project.ID AS PROJECT_ID, (SELECT SUM(PaymentAmount) FROM Payment WHERE ProjectID = PROJECT_ID) AS TotalPaidBack, (SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT DonorID) FROM Contribution WHERE RecipientID = PROJECT_ID) AS ContributorCount, (SELECT SUM(Amount) FROM Contribution WHERE RecipientID = PROJECT_ID) AS TotalReceived FROM Project; </code></pre> <p>Using a temporary table:</p> <pre><code>DROP TABLE IF EXISTS Project_Temp; CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE Project_Temp (project_id INT NOT NULL, total_payments INT, total_donors INT, total_received INT, PRIMARY KEY(project_id)) ENGINE=MEMORY; INSERT INTO Project_Temp (project_id,total_payments) SELECT `Project`.ID, IFNULL(SUM(PaymentAmount),0) FROM `Project` LEFT JOIN `Payment` ON ProjectID = `Project`.ID GROUP BY 1; INSERT INTO Project_Temp (project_id,total_donors,total_received) SELECT `Project`.ID, IFNULL(COUNT(DISTINCT DonorID),0), IFNULL(SUM(Amount),0) FROM `Project` LEFT JOIN `Contribution` ON RecipientID = `Project`.ID GROUP BY 1 ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE total_donors = VALUES(total_donors), total_received = VALUES(total_received); SELECT * FROM Project_Temp; </code></pre> <p>Tests for both are pretty comparable, in the 0.7 - 0.8 seconds range with 1,000 rows. But I'm really concerned about scalability, and I don't want to have to re-engineer everything as my tables grow. What's the best approach?</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PTQuestion
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. USAaron Carlino
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    2. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    3. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. POWhat's the most efficient query?
      1. USRobert Harvey
      1. VTFavorite
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. POWhat's the most efficient query?
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload